click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121201
20121231
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3
of men ghazi. we have an expeditionary diplomatic corps, and they do face very real risks every day, day in and day out. bad things have happened before, and bad things will happen again, unfortunately, in the future. there will always be a tension between the diplomatic imperative to get outside the wire and the security standards that require our diplomats to work behind high walls and full-body searches. we do not want to conner is tee that wire america off from the world. our challenge is to strike a balance between the necessity of the mission, available resources and toll wraps for risk -- tolerance for risk. we've talked about this on this committee. we've had hearingsings specifically about the design of our embassies, the danger of becoming a fortress america. we need to be safe, but we also need to send the right message to the people that we're trying to reach. i distinctly remember feeling and seeing the difficulty of this in vietnam where villages would examine us suspiciously and give us a stare, an unmistakeable stare that raises many more questions than we're ever able to
and foreign policy. a tragedy occurred in benghazi. ghazi is inherently unstable. would that be a fair statement, ambassador burns? you might guess commissary. then ghazi in that. and to this day still in a very unstable place. >> have you read the report chaired by ambassador pickering and admiral mullen? >> i certainly have. >> tobacco include the susan rice for secretary clinton or charlene lamb were responsible, was that the conclusion of this report? >> the report concluded it was terrorists responsible for the deaths of our four colleagues. >> at the report concluded deliberate or less than deliberate effort to cover that fact at any time at the time of the events are subsequently? >> no commissary. >> is it fair perhaps to conclude that in retrospect, mistakes are made within the state department about the allocation of resources and the nature and extent of security that needed to be provided to benghazi? >> is certainly is. it is quite clear and candid in identifying problems that occurred. those problems are unacceptable. we take responsibility for them and we are working ver
is because the come the case of the ghazi demonstrates. the biggest policy questions, which i hope we debate is how we become more nimble and understand political trends of the society. thanks. [applause] >> thank you very much, brian. dan, you're a. >> first of all, i'm very honored to be here. and particularly honored to be on the panel of just the greatest admiration to be with this mostly distinguished panel. [laughter] with the exception of course is reuel. and now, the austrian physicist, wolfgang pauli used to put down his worst students by saying, you're not even wrong. [laughter] and that's how i'm inclined to take particularly reuel's comments. i'll spare you because we don't know each other as well. if i say to my son, what is five plus seven and 611, that is wrong. if he says that nana, he's not even wrong. what you just heard from reuel especially as nanette. this is the argument because woody is just essentially done in a very slippery and disingenuous way to say that the choice we face is between secular dictatorship of mopar escapes or other stripes, perhaps assad is democrac
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3